The Labor enquirer., 1887-12-17

one including the other in this
case. Now "the first principle Of
classification is that the classes
should nct include one another"
so the "arti6ciality and utter USE
lessness" of this distinction sbe-
come instantly apparent" that is
to say that for all practical pur-
poses these two classes of writer
and burglar do not exist. and DR..
Hill may be styled a burglar, or
at least the same title may apply
to both professions. TShould il
be objected that the professions Of
writer and burglar are very rarely
combined, and the case therefore
exceptional, / would point out
those of author and doctor Of
medicine. l do not know of any
well-known doctor who is not also
an author
Towards the end of the chapter
DR.. Hill makes the preposterous
assertion that the more immediate
aim of the Socialists ''is to capture
for themselves as much existing
wealth as possible;" by which he
may be supposed to mean that
the thousands who have forsaken
everything for the cause, have
faced death and endured impris-
onment, did it for the love of
wealth! 1t were strange if a man
should give up his fortune and his
home and endure exile (as tor in
stance did Krapotkine, who is now
working for Socialism in England)
all for the sake of wealth! It were
stranger still if those who died in
Chicago died for wealth! But
even this foul libel is made to
do for argument, and the igno-
rant in their prejudice "think it
must be So"
Though advancing this lust for
wealth" on the part of the Social
lists our author, strangely enough.
regards it otherwise lin non-So-
cialists) as a virtue and encour-
ages money-getting. Thousands
of our countrymen" he says "have
accumulated wealth." and further:
1T is the hope and ambition of
every aspiring man to do the
same" And then we have the
familiar argument that what one
man has done another might do,
and therefore all, by energy, in
dustry, intelligence and economy"
might become wealthy. Once up
on time the king passed through
a certain town. The populace as
Sembled in a crowd TO see him.
but the front row could not see
over the soldiers nor the back
rows over the front one, and there
fore in the whole crowd only one
man saw the king. He, wiser
than the rest, had brought stool
/ on which he stood and so saw
over the peoples heads. A month
afterwards the king again passed
and this time everyone brought
a stool. with the natural result that
though they all stood higher, none
could see. so it is with wealth;
because a few have robbed the
many and so got rich it does not
follow that all could do the same
--on the contrary, the very fact of
living without producing necessi-
tates a large class of producers
who do not receive the value of
their work. 1t is said some not
over-wise philanthropists, being
convinced that interest was nat
ural increase on capital, and due
therefore only to the capitalist,
and further that with sum of
money (say $4,000 one coud live
on the interest alone. aspired t.
the time when by patient accumu-
lation the human race might have
acquired sufficient capital to live
on interest. and so be absolved
from work! would like to shut
such one and his money in a
closed room and see how long he
Gould 1:,,o ,,oon <Lo :c%o.ocx1f -